VDARE

Ann Coulter has been makingtherounds of conservative media over the past couple of weeks promoting her new book, “Adios America! The Left’s Plan To Turn Our Country Into A Third World Hellhole,” which is about as subtle an anti-immigrant polemic as it sounds.

As the Southern Poverty Law Center pointed out when Coulter’s book came out, Coulter remains a reliable presence in right-wing media and politics, despite the fact that her comments on race in America are pretty much indistinguishable from those of the white nationalist leaders who have largely been ostracized from the conservative mainstream.

This is not just a coincidence. In fact, Coulter revealed this weekend in an interview with Chronicles, a magazine published by the conservative Rockford Institute, that she was inspired to become involved in the anti-immigrant movement after reading a 1992 National Review article by Peter Brimelow, who is now the editor of the white nationalist website VDARE.

In the article that inspired Coulter, Brimelow (himself an immigrant from England) lamented high levels of non-white immigration, writing, “Just as when you leave Park Avenue and descend into the subway, on entering the INS waiting rooms you find yourself in an underworld that is almost entirely colored.” He went on to warn National Review readers of the impending non-white majority in the United States:

Above all, the American ethnic mix has been upset. In 1960, the U.S. population was 88.6 per cent white; in 1990, it was only 75.6 per cent white—a drop of 13 percentage points in thirty years. (Indeed, the proportion of “European-Americans” is probably a couple of percentage points lower than that, because the Census Bureau counts all Middle Easterners as “white.”) The demographer Leon Bouvier has projected that by 2020—that is, easily within the lifetimes of many NATIONAL REVIEW readers—the proportion of whites could fall as low as 61 per cent. Among children under 15, minorities could be approaching the point of becoming the majority.

Coulter told Chronicles’ Tom Patiak that she has continued to discuss her work on immigration with Brimelow, who followed his National Review article with the bestselling anti-immigrant book “Alien Nation”:

TP: How did you first become interested in immigration?

A: Peter Brimelow’s front page article in National Review. [But] then I never wrote about it. I was practicing law then, and you know you live in a bubble in college and law school. I suppose I believed all the Jack Kemp nonsense. I read that cover story in National Review and realized I’d been had. I’ve been lied to. Oh my gosh! It was the only time I remember completely changing my mind about something. Of course there wasn’t that much to change because immigration wasn’t something I had ever thought about. I was like a lot of Americans to this day, you just go along: We’re a nation of immigrants, immigration is a wonderful thing, aren’t they hard workers, blah, blah, blah. And since I became a writer, Peter has been haranguing me, demanding to know why I haven’t written about immigration. I kept telling him, because you said it all. I’ve nothing new to say. So I am pleased that with this book—you have to get to chapter 7 and you start hitting things that, I think, surprised even Peter. He wanted me to start the book at chapter 7: Just skip everything before, everybody knows that first stuff, Ann. But I had to stay: If only everybody did know that stuff.

Earlier in the interview, when Patiak asked her to list her “intellectual influences” on immigration, she responded, “Well, obviously Peter Brimelow, who is the one who started it all, God bless him.”

Brimelow’s VDARE has excitedly promoted Coulter’s Chronicles interview, perhaps because its writers don’t always get credit when their ideas get absorbed into the conservative mainstream. For instance, VDARE has been seeking credit from the GOP for the increasing popularity of an idea put forward by its contributor Steve Sailer, who was the first to outline in detail a supposed path to victory for Republicans that relies solely on white voters. Ann Coulter, incidentally, has credited Sailer for the “Sailer strategy” and continues to heartily endorse it. Last year, Coulter cited Sailer's work in a speech from the mainstage at CPAC.

White nationalist commentator Peter Brimelow, the editor of VDARE, joined Steve Deace last week to discuss the reaction to a grand jury’s decision not to indict a Ferguson, Missouri, police officer in the shooting death of unarmed black teenager Michael Brown.

Deace told Brimelow that he thought President Obama — who opened his remarks on the grand jury decision by urging protesters to act “peacefully” — had not done enough to prevent violence and looting in Ferguson, and that the president should “have gone down to Ferguson and led peaceful marches and marched with the family and preempted the thuggery we saw on display last night.”

But Brimelow disagreed. “Actually, you know, I think the criminality in the American underclass is so great that nothing other than force can stop it, frankly speaking,” he said, arguing that President Obama should instead have sent the National Guard into Ferguson.

“The problem is that they’re fundamentally on the side of the rioters,” he said of the Obama administration. “We’re in a very bad situation here, you know, a lot of people in the federal government are fundamentally anti-American.”

And if UKIP can do it in a media climate even worse than that of America, there’s no reason Americans can’t.

Parties die if they don’t respond to changing conditions. The person who can control a thing has a power to destroy it. Immigration patriots have, if not the power to fully control the GOP, at least the power to prevent it from ever winning another election.

Tills made the remarks while discussing the need for the Republican Party to reach out to and appeal to non-white voters — but the phrase “traditional population” as a euphemism for white Americans was lifted right from the racist, anti-immigrant fringe.

The phrase is also a favorite of William Gheen, the leader of the anti-immigrant hate group Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, who warned earlier this year that immigration reform would “lead to a situation where traditional Americans, like those that have been here for hundreds of years in descendancy, will no longer govern our own nation.”

Eagle Forum, the group founded by Phyllis Schlafly, hinted at the same idea when it lamented that “non-whites, non-Christians, and non-marrieds vote Democrat out of group identifications. That is, they see it as being in their group interests to tear down traditional American culture.”

Last year, we reported that VDARE writer John Derbyshire (formerly of the National Review) was annoyed that prominent Republicans were failing to credit racist VDARE writer Steve Sailer when they advocated a plan nearly identical to the ‘Sailer Strategy’: that is, the idea that the GOP can only survive by solidifying and growing its white base while alienating people of color. Sailer had been persistently advocating this tactic for over a decade when it suddenly came into vogue among conservatives who opposed the Gang of Eight’s immigration reform plan.

Now, another VDARE writer is upset that more and more immigration reform opponents are pushing another VDARE argument without giving the white nationalists credit. This time, the argument is that steady or increased legal immigration – with or without a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrations – will ruin the Republican party because immigrants are inherently liberal.

In a post on Friday, VDARE writer James Fulford highlights a recent study from the Center for Immigration Studies which argues that Republicans shouldn’t bother with immigration reform because immigrants will inevitably vote for Democrats. Fulford complains that neither the CIS report nor the conservative outlets covering it “manages to credit Peter Brimelow or VDARE.com for saying all this early and often, possibly because it they're scared of Media Matters and the SPLC.” As he notes, VDARE has been pushing the argument since as earlyas 2001.

It’s no surprise that this idea originated in the racist underworld of VDARE. After all, the subtext of the argument is that the GOP should rely on what Pat Buchanan called a new “Southern Strategy” and dump any plans to expand its appeal beyond its mostly white base. As the “Southern Strategy” comparison makes clear, that involves both scapegoating immigrants and ignoring their voices in government.

Steve Sailer of the white nationalist site VDARE – also known as the originator of the now-popular “Sailer Strategy” for an all-white GOP – has a modest proposal for a new, segregated government leadership.

Sailer, who has apparently had quite enough of President Obama, suggests in a blog post today that “a giant empire like modern America would be better off splitting the roles of ceremonial Head of State and utilitarian Head of Government, rather than in getting them all entwined.”

He recommends that the new ceremonial position would be the perfect fit for “some senior black entertainment or athletic figure” such as Morgan Freeman or Oprah Winfrey.

He laments that instead of putting an African-American in a purely ceremonial role, “out of that urge, we elected a part time college professor to fill both jobs in a mediocre fashion.”

Having spent about 15 seconds in The Presence in 1987, Oprah remains the greatest natural politician I've ever met.

Personally, I think a giant empire like modern America would be better off splitting the roles of ceremonial Head of State and utilitarian Head of Government, rather than in getting them all entwined. The Premier or whatever we'd call him would, in today's culture, typically be some senior black entertainment or athletic figure: James Earl Jones in the past, Morgan Freeman today, Oprah tomorrow, maybe David Robinson after her.

Instead, out of that urge, we elected a part time college professor to fill both jobs in a mediocre fashion

Trust the white nationalists at VDARE.com to come up with a racist, anti-immigrant angle to the winter Olympics.

While others might have been touched by the story of Paraguayan-born American slopestyle skier Julia Marino becoming Paraguay’s very first winter Olympian (she holds dual citizenship), VDARE writer Matthew Richer sees it as proof that Latino immigrants are unable to assimilate into American culture. “If an Hispanic immigrant with this kind of privileged American upbringing cannot assimilate, what hope is there for the rest of them?” he writes.

Of course, Richer doesn’t bother to question whether Staten Island investment banker Gary di Silvestri’sdecision to compete in the Olympics for the nation of Dominica (also becoming that country’s first winter Olympian) means that Italian-Americans are unable to assimilate into American culture, but we’re sure that was his next point.

Marino was adopted as a baby and enjoyed a privileged American upbringing. She even attended a waspy New England boarding school where she competed on the ski team.

But even though Marino only recently visited Paraguay for the first time since her adoption, she is now in Sochi to represent her country. “The Olympics [is] about representing where you’re from,” she told The Boston Globe. Indeed.

If an Hispanic immigrant with this kind of privileged American upbringing cannot assimilate, what hope is there for the rest of them?

RWW’s Paranoia-Rama takes a look at five of the week’s most absurd conspiracy theories from the Right.

Did you know that you can be thrown in jail simply for criticizing President Obama? Or that Obama will soon pretend to speak with aliens as part of a ploy to silence the criticism that he has apparently already criminalized? Learn more in this week’s edition of Paranoia-Rama:

5. Obama’s Alien-Canadian Plot

Since President Obama failed to nuke the U.S. and kill 90 percent of Americans, activist Jim Garrow claims that he is now preparing “the greatest deception that mankind has ever faced”: contact with alien life.

Apparently, attempting to nuke America didn’t help the president become more popular, so Garrow reasons that the president will now try to improve his polling numbers by pretending to be in “communication with people from other civilizations beyond Earth.” Garrow argues that if that doesn’t work, Obama will call in troops from Canada to start repressing and killing civilians… including Garrow himself.

4. Mexican Food Destroying America

The White Nationalists over at VDARE are outraged by the way the Associated Press reported on salsa becoming America’s No. 1 condiment. VDARE linked the stories of salsa overtaking ketchup to the War on Christmas, arguing that the media is trying to undercut America’s cultural identity with “Hispanic Cuisine Hype” and “the Demographic-Change-Is-Inevitable theme.”

Blogger Allan Wall asked, ruefully, if the “historic American nation” is about to be “radically transformed, beyond recognition, without our permission?”

3. Nelson Mandela Comic Book Is Dangerous Communist Brainwashing

Accuracy In Media’s Cliff Kincaid is upset about the release of a new comic book chronicling the life of Nelson Mandela, which Kincaid fears will indoctrinate kids into communism by not calling Mandela a communist.

“If used in schools and libraries, this comic book will deceive ‘students and reluctant readers’ about how communism has come to power in South Africa. What purpose is served by that?” Kincaid asks. “It will enable the same forces to make even more gains around the world, including in the United States, by operating as ‘progressives.’”

He is also upset that people refer to South Africa as a democratic state, as Kincaid believes it is a communist nation committing anti-white genocide.

2. It Is Now Illegal To Criticize Obama!

If it was a crime to criticize President Obama, then almost everyone we monitor here on RightWingWatch would probably be in jail right now. But televangelists Jim Bakker and Rick Joyner now seem to believe that the government has banned criticism of Obama.

“Usually I don’t mention the president anymore, it’s very frightening, because they can take and put you in prison now if you speak out against our leaders,” Bakker said. “I don’t know what happened to America, this is not the America I knew when I was a boy.” Joyner added: “I believe if we don’t speak out we’re all going to be in prison very, very soon.”

Of course, this is the exact same shtick that the far right used to gin up fear and anger during the debate over the 2009 Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Religious Right activists predicted that anti-gay activists and pastors would be thrown into jail as soon as the law was enacted. Of course, they were lying.

1. Benghazi Conspiracy Theory Gets Even More Desperate

As their conspiracy theory surrounding the 2012 Benghazi attack continues to unravel, now right-wing activists and Republicans claim the New York Times is part of a cover-up…of something.

Of course, the congressmen have absolutely no evidence to back up any of their allegations, but it’s not like a lack of evidence got in the way of their increasingly desperate and partisan Benghazi witch hunt.

The white nationalists at VDARE have responded to the death of Nelson Mandela with a flurry of blog posts painting the former South African leader as a “monster” and “nasty individual” responsible for destroying “first-world South Africa.”

In an essay posted on VDARE just hours after Mandela’s death, “RIP Nelson Mandela – And The Dream of A First-World South Africa,” James Kirkpatrick wrote, “The legacy of Nelson Mandela is a slow motion white genocide and the ruin of a once great country.” The end of apartheid, he argued “should provide a useful lesson for Western whites who are being reduced to minorities in their own historic homelands”:

The legacy of Nelson Mandela is slow motion white genocide and the ruin of a once great country. However, he didn’t kill all his opponents. Implicit in the rejoicing of the Main Stream Media at his legacy is the idea that South African whites deserve to be murdered, but Mandela magnanimously refrained. This should provide a useful lesson for Western whites who are being reduced to minorities in their own historic homelands.

In “post-Apartheid” South Africa, all one has to do to be a civil rights hero is not be too enthusiastic in calling for the murder of whites. If one does kill them, the media won’t praise you… but they won’t condemn you either.

We all must face death, so RIP to Nelson Mandela. He certainly is not the worst leader Africa has produced.

But what no one else will say is: RIP to the Boer farmers being murdered every day, to the Afrikaners attacked in the streets, to the poor blacks savaged by ANC thugs and police... .and finally, rest in peace, the dream of a First World South Africa.

The next day, VDARE’s Patrick Cleburne chimed in with a blog post calling Mandela a “nasty individual.”

“What America should be celebrating is the courage and wisdom of the leaders of White South Africa in keeping this monster away from power until it was, for his purposes, too late,” Cleburne wrote.

John Derbyshire, for his part, compared the international mourning for Mandela to North Korean displays of grief after the death of Kim John Il.

The violent, extreme right Golden Dawn, a Greek political party implicated in organized crime, has found an ally in VDARE’s Nicholas Stix, who claims that “Golden Dawn is simply resisting this genocidal process.” He lauds Golden Dawn for “resisting the extermination of the Greek people” in the face of “mass non-white, Third World immigration.”

“And if they want to survive, other Western nations will, one way or another, have to make the same choice – no matter what names they are called,” Stix writes.

However, one thing I do not doubt about the party: It does seek to run all aliens out of the country.

Let’s not beat around the bush. Golden Dawn are a brutal lot. But it is a party in a revolutionary situation, confronted with mass non-white, Third World immigration into the West. In Greece, an incredible two million immigrants, most of them recently-arrived, illegal, non-white, and Muslim, are leeching off and dispossessing the mere 10.8 million white, 98 percent Orthodox Christian, Greeks. [The CIA World Factbook, last checked on November 22, 2013.]

Greece is one of the main entry points for illegal immigration from Africa and Asia, most of it from across the Turkish frontier. Back in 2010, up to 350 immigrants were crossing the border every day, accounting for about 90 per cent of all illegal immigrants coming into Europe. [Uncontrolled immigration is fuelling Greece's violent street politics. The EU needs to sit up and take notice by Colin Freeman, Telegraph, last updated: September 30th, 2013.]

Some Greek businessmen support the invaders, based on the usual short-sighted Slave Power-type greed. But the most powerful force behind the invasion is the European Union. The EU is actively pushing policies that will result in genocide against all indigenous, European peoples.

…

Golden Dawn is simply resisting this genocidal process and filling a political vacuum.

…

Peter Brimelow coined the phrase “Hitler’s revenge” in his 1995 book Alien Nation to describe how Western nations, repulsed by Nazism, have reacted by abolishing their own identities, so in the end, Hitler is actually achieving his goal of destroying his enemies.

When government refuses to perform its core functions such as protecting the borders and enforcing the laws, the nation has a choice. Citizens can either step in to do the job, or the nation will perish.

No, former National Review columnist John Derbyshire hasn’t seen 12 Years a Slave, but he knows it is a bad movie because it is unfair to the poor, persecuted and maligned slave-owners of the antebellum South. In hislatest racist column, Derbyshire calls 12 Years a Slave “Abolitionist Porn” and chides the film for not including what he sees as the happier instances of slavery, such as one slaveholder who only doled out beatings “once in a while.”

“Plainly there was more to American race slavery that white masters brutalizing resentful Negroes,” Derbyshire writes. “Slavery is more irksome to some than to others; and freedom can be irksome, too.”

Derbyshire compares slavery in the US to the communist system in China, saying that “while there was much grumbling, and some scattered seething rebelliousness, most Chinese got along with the system. A lot of people were very happy with it.”

“In the matter of slavery, though, I already feel sure that the shallow good North, bad South simplicities of Abolitionist Porn and popular perception bear little relation to the thorny tangles of reality,” he concludes.

It seems I’ve picked up an interest in the Civil War just as America is undergoing a revival of Abolitionist Porn. That, at any rate, is what I take this much-talked-of new movie 12 Years a Slave to be.

No, I haven’t seen the thing, but I’ve read reviews. Also I’ve seen (and reviewed) a specimen of the allied genre: Civil Rights Porn.

And I’ve no doubt there was such a thing as Abolitionist Porn. It would have been surprising if there wasn’t. Whenever there’s a deep and long-standing difference between two sets of social principles, a genre of lurid tales will come up in one camp, denigrating the other.

…

The Slave Narratives are recorded reminiscences from ex-slaves, gathered by the Federal Writers’ Project in 1936-38. The speaker here was born “around 1852”:

Mars George fed an’ clo’esed well an’ was kin’ to his slaves, but once in a while one would git onruly an’ have to be punished. De worse I ever seen one whupped was a slave man dat had slipped off an’ hid out in de woods to git out of wuk. Dey chased him wid blood hounds, an’ when dey did fin’ him dey tied him to a tree, stroppin’ him ’round an’ ’round. Dey sho’ did gib him a lashin’.

[Mississippi Slave Narratives, Harriet Walker.]

As that extract illustrates, though, the Slave Narratives also remind us how remarkably often ex-slaves spoke well of their masters.

Plainly there was more to American race slavery that white masters brutalizing resentful Negroes. How much more, though? What was slavery actually like?

…

People are born, raised, educated, and find themselves in a certain kind of society to which those around them are all accustomed. American slave society was a way of life; a settled way that most people took for granted, as most people will anywhere.

There were aspects of life resembling slavery in the communist China where I lived, 1982-3. People had no liberty to find their own employment. You were “assigned” to a “unit.” If unhappy there, it was a devil of a job to get re-assigned.

Families broken up? One of my Chinese colleagues lived alone because his wife was “assigned” to a distant province. He only saw her once a year.

The guy drank a lot.

Yet while there was much grumbling, and some scattered seething rebelliousness, most Chinese got along with the system. A lot of people were very happy with it. You didn’t have to think much, or take much responsibility. And that suits many of us just fine.

…

Slavery is more irksome to some than to others; and freedom can be irksome, too. Personally, I’d be a terrible slave—too ornery. I know people, though—and I’m talking about white people—who I quietly suspect would be happy in slavery.

…

In the matter of slavery, though, I already feel sure that the shallow good North, bad South simplicities of Abolitionist Porn and popular perception bear little relation to the thorny tangles of reality.

Nicholas Stix of the white nationalist group VDARE thinks the US Navy has become nothing more than a “racial socialist welfare agency,” and is pointing to recent corruption scandals as proof that policies encouraging diversity are a failure. He says that the military is committing “unconstitutional discrimination against heterosexual, white men” and warns that, as a result, the Navy “will sink when it faces a real crisis—along with the future of the historic American nation.”

In what the Washington Post called the biggest bribery case “the Navy has confronted in years,” the skipper of a naval cruiser and a senior logistics officer allegedly gave classified information to a contractor regarding ship movements, in exchange for prostitutes, tickets to Lady Gaga concerts (!!!), and cash. The information, which imperiled national security, was allegedly used by the contractor to defraud the Navy (i.e., the white American net tax base) out of millions of dollars.

The two main defendants:

• Cmdr. Michael Misiewicz, code-name “Brudda, ”Cambodian birth name “Vannak Khem.” He was adopted by Army administrative assistant Maryna Misiewicz and benefitted from a Navy Affirmative Action program, with got a slot that should have gone to a qualified, white American… and (allegedly) paid back his adoptive country by selling it out.

• Leonard Francis, CEO of Glenn Defense Marine Asia, known widely as “Fat Leonard,” “Lion King” and “Boss,” is a Malaysian national based out of Singapore. Three others are also charged: senior logistics officer Cmdr. Jose Luis Sanchez; senior Navy investigator, Naval Criminal Investigative Service Supervisory Special Agent John Bertrand Beliveau II, who allegedly funneled inside information about the investigation to Francis; and Francis’ subordinate Alex Wisidagama.

…

The background: it is simply a fact is that the U.S. Navy now systematically discriminates against qualified white Americans in favor of politically protected non-whites. As Admiral Mike Mullen put it during his tenure as chief of naval operations, “diversity” is a “‘strategic imperative.’”

Last year, Peter Brimelow was a panelist at CPAC; this year he is having his columns rejected as “too extreme” by WorldNetDaily. In a blog post on VDARE today, Brimelow writes that a column he wrote about the immigration debate was just too out there for WND:

The difficulty in the immigration debate is what I called in Alien Nation back in 1995 “Hitler’s Revenge.” The elites of the West emerged from WWII utterly traumatized by the experience of confronting Nazism. It was so traumatic that they went overboard on the opposite side. They became convinced that any discussion of ethnicity or cultural heritage at all, let alone race, was unthinkable. You couldn’t address these things without being a Nazi.

…

My personal view is that the counter to the charge of racism is the charge of treason. What these people are doing is treason: they intend to destroy the historic American nation as it had evolved to 1965.

However, I wrote a column a couple of weeks ago saying this which was rejected as too extreme by WND—a considerable feat!

A “considerable feat” indeed.

What is in this too-crazy-for-WND column?

Brimelow argues that Democrats’ supposed support of an “invasion” and “colonization” of the US by non-white immigrants is treason because it reduces the percentage of the white population.

Hard to believe that WND, which has published Brimelow’s columns previously and is the home of anti-immigrant writers such as Ann Coulter, Pat Buchanan, Tom Tancredo and Jerome Corsi (who peddle the same fears about the death of White America and the GOP), would find anything wrong with this column.

We don’t know what WND’s editors were thinking, because this reads just like a column one would see on their site.

There is a word that has the same incantatory power—and, unlike the charge of “racism,” it happens to be accurate. That word is “Treason.”

What the Left, the Democrats, and the immigration enthusiasts are doing to America is treason.

…

But the Founders did not mean that only armed attack constituted treason. The Supreme Court, in Cramer (1945), quoted a definition of treason as "an act which weakens or tends to weaken the power of the [United States] . . ." Treason required an act and conscious intent; but not necessarily war.

And this definition of treason must be read in the context of what the Founders believed they were doing. The preamble to the Constitution begins: "We, the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity . . ." [Italics mine.]

Not posterity in general, note—but the specific posterity of those men who signed that document. They represented a full-fledged nation, an organic ethnocultural community. Newcomers might be assimilated (although the Founders were actually fairly skeptical about further immigration, and there was in fact very little for several decades after the Revolution). But there was no thought that immigrants should transform.

Yet Leftists have no hesitations about boasting openly that they plan to displace this American Founding nation through a public policy—immigration.

For example, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the appalling Democratic National Committee Chairthing, has boasted that her party will be swept to power by the immigration-driven “browning of America.”

…

Democrat policy is to swamp the historic American nation by abetting, not just an invasion by foreigners, but colonization—the development of enclaves that are to all intents and purposes no longer American territory.

As leaders of the Republican Party debate whether their party can remain viable without expanding its appeal among black and Latino voters, the white nationalist group that first outlined a GOP “whites-only” strategy for presidential victories wants credit for its idea.

In November of 2000, as George W. Bush and Al Gore were still wrangling over a handful of hanging chads in Florida, Steve Sailer, anunabashedlyracistcolumnist for the white nationalist site VDARE, wrote a column outlining a potential strategy for the GOP to remain strong in the face of changing demographics. In his column, titled “GOP Future Depends on Winning Larger Share of the White Vote,” Sailer crunched exit poll numbers and outlined a strategy by which the Republican Party could lose “every single nonwhite vote” and still win the presidency by working to increase its share of working class white voters. Sailer and VDARE continued to promote this strategy for over a decade, arguing that Republican attempts to reach out to people of color were not only bad politics, but also a losing strategy.

In the wake of President Obama’s reelection – which relied in a large part on the GOP’s alienation of black and Latino voters – the “Sailer Strategy” has seen a popular resurgence among the Right. While some GOP leaders, like RNC chairman Reince Priebus, have trumpeted the need for the party to expand its base in the face of changing demographics, others – including Phyllis Schlafly, Pat Buchanan, leaders in the anti-immigrant movement, and the editors of The National Review and The Weekly Standard– have argued that the GOP can instead build a lasting strategy by increasing its share of the white vote. These leaders argue that any effort to build a more inclusive Republican Party – and especially any effort to update the country’s immigration policy – would in the long term be futile because, as Schlafly indelicately put it, Latino voters don’t “have any Republican inclinations at all.”

The mostly implicit, but sometimes explicit, subtext in the push for this strategy is that it would be partly achieved by stirring up racial resentments among white voters against the country’s growing Latino population. Buchanan put it most clearly when he called for a renewal of the Southern Strategy – which fundamentally realigned the Republican Party by digging up and egging on Southern white racism against African Americans – only this time with Latinos as the target. (Not coincidentally, Buchanan and Schlafly have both cited Sailer's writings on race in their own work.)

In a fascinating National Journal cover story this week, Ronald Brownstein examines the numbers behind the increasingly popular GOP “whites-only” strategy, concluding that the combination of an expanding non-white population, growing Democratic trends among white voters and the geographical distribution of swing states, make it unlikely to succeed.

Republican strategist White Ayres put it more bluntly in an interview with Brownstein. The strategy, he said, “is not getting much penetration among people who are serious about winning presidential elections. It is getting traction among people who are trying to justify voting against immigration reform or making any of the other changes that are necessary to be nationally competitive in the 21st century."

Which, of course, was the whole point of the idea from its very first airing in Steve Sailer’s column.

Among those unhappy with Brownstein’s rigorously reported story were, predictably, the white nationalists at VDARE, who are not only still on board with the “whites-only” strategy, but are upset that now that the theory has taken off, Sailer is no longer getting credit for it. John Derbyshire, the VDARE columnist fired by The National Review after he wrote one too many racist screed, comes to the defense of Sailer and his strategy against Brownstein’s logic:

The wonkery here is, as you can see, very deep. For VDARE.com readers it is also deeply frustrating.

The central point of discussion here, the desirability of the GOP increasing its appeal to white voters, is the Sailer Strategy, which we have been airing, with full supporting numerical analyses, since the 2000 election.

We know that a prophet is without honor in his own country. But surely an occasional linked reference wouldn’t hurt?

Derbyshire then laments that the Sailer Strategy would be easier to implement if whites were not “too intensely engaged in their Cold Civil War—too much wrapped up in the pleasures of hating other whites—to unite as a tribe.” But he echoes other commentators in suggesting that it could be done if Republicans embraced a message of economic populism:

Note that, contra Ronald Brownstein’s title, there are some conceivable circumstances in which Republicans could win with whites alone.

Whites were 72 percent of the electorate in 2012. On current demographic trends, that number will decline at roughly two percent per 4-year cycle. That gives us ten or a dozen cycles in which whites are a majority of the electorate—well past mid-century.

If whites were to vote for white GOP presidential candidates as tribally as blacks vote for a black Democrat, with no additional votes from minorities at all, the presidency would be decided by the white vote alone in all but the last of those cycles.

Even if whites nationwide just voted as tribally as white Mississippians did last November (89 percent for Romney), all but the last three of those cycles would be a lock.

Well, conceivable, perhaps, but neither thing will happen. Whites are too intensely engaged in their Cold Civil War—too much wrapped up in the pleasures of hating other whites—to unite as a tribe.

What could happen, what we should wish to happen, is a turn on the part of the GOP to economic populism, as recommended by Sean Trende, and more recently by my VDARE.com colleague James Kirkpatrick in his article on Colorado:

Rather than serving as corporate lobbyists for the ultra-rich, the GOP should wage war on big money in politics and embrace a populist strategy against bankers, cheap labor, and offshoring.

A well-pitched populist appeal from an attractive candidate could reach parts that the current corporatist, big-donor-whipped GOP is not reaching. The fundamental issues are not hard to get across.

We don't agree with John Derbyshire on a lot, but we do agree with him on one thing: Republican proponents of the Sailer Strategy should give credit where credit's due.

Steve Sailer, columnist for the white nationalist site VDARE and inspiration to conservative leaders including Pat Buchanan and Phyllis Schlafly, commemorates the anniversary of the March on Washington this week by suggesting that President Obama use the occasion to “declare victory in the long war on Jim Crow and white racism.”

But Sailer doesn’t do a great job backing up his point, as he launches straight into another suggestion for the president: eliminate the “racial divisiveness” of the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday by moving it to August…unless it is “the current (unspoken) thinking that holding the MLK holiday in dead cold winter keeps blacks from making trouble.”

I've long offered two suggestions, one that Obama would never take up (although deep down, during his most depressed episodes, he might have to admit it makes sense), the other of which he might adopt. After all, my second proposal is at least more relevant to the current occasion than shortening law school is.

Why not use that propitious occasion to declare victory in the long war on Jim Crow and white racism and announce you are bringing the federal troops home?

The second is to use the celebration over MLK's famous speech on August 28, 1963 to call for permanently commemorating the event by moving the currently not very popular MLK holiday from the frigid middle of January to late August:

Fortunately, one simple change in the holiday could end this racial divisiveness and unite workers of all colors in demanding a paid holiday honoring King.

…

Or is the current (unspoken) thinking that holding the MLK holiday in dead cold winter keeps blacks from making trouble? Maybe. But my vague impression is that late spring or early summer is the rowdiest time of the year, while late summer is mellower, more lazy and hazy than crazy. Somebody should study the subject using data.

Sailer writes that eventually, becoming the “White Party” will help Republicans gain support among Latinos and Asians who would rather join the White-GOP than the Democratic “Black Party.”

Just like Rep. Louie Gohmert , Sailer claims that the key to winning Hispanic support is opposing immigration reform.

“If Americans whites started treating themselves with self-respect (e.g., don’t roll over for illegal aliens with fifth-grade educations), the Latinos would more or less fall in line as they tried to be white in an American where whiteness is no longer demonized,” Sailer explains. “Hispanic and Asian voters should be encouraged to understand the central American political reality: they only get to choose between being the junior partners in the White Party or junior partners in the Black Party.”

If Americans whites started treating themselves with self-respect (e.g., don’t roll over for illegal aliens with fifth-grade educations), the Latinos would more or less fall in line as they tried to be white in an American where whiteness is no longer demonized.

Sean Trende told Brookings that the GOP might get up to 20 percent of the black vote someday. To me, that seems both implausible and unwise. The natural sweep of American politics is from blacks on the Left to, say, Mormons on the conservative side. In 2012, for instance, Romney got 3 percent of the black vote and 86 percent of the Mormon vote. (Of course, that gap was exaggerated by the identities of the two candidates last November, but it’s still characteristic).

Instead, my suggestion: rather than devote immense effort to pursuing a tiny number of persuadable black voters, Republicans would be smarter to concede that the Democrats are the natural home of blacks … and that blacks, as historic Americans, deserve to have a major party defer to them!

Indeed, just as Republicans are constantly demonized as the “White Party,” they should praise the Democrats for being the natural "Black Party"—the rightful vehicle for African American political aspirations, since blacks are the moral core of the Democrats.

…

Hispanic and Asian voters should be encouraged to understand the central American political reality: they only get to choose between being the junior partners in the White Party or junior partners in the Black Party.

When that reality is made clear, white Democratic grandees like Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer might be very surprised by what happens to their Rainbow Coalition.

Noting that Southern lawmakers have traditionally supported punitive and restrictive immigration policies, William Houston of the white nationalist group VDARE thinks it might be time for the South to once again mount a rebellion if Congress approves immigration reform. Houston believes that Southern opposition to new immigration laws, along with marriage equality, affirmative action, Obamacare, environmental protection and gun violence prevention legislation, are reason enough for the states to secede from the US and refuse to “continue to carry the rest of America on its back.”

How long can Dixie continue to carry the rest of America on its back? In the U.S. Senate, the Northeastern states voted 21 to 1 in favor of "comprehensive immigration reform." In 2010, every single representative from New England voted for the DREAM Act. And in 1965, every single representative in the House from the Northeast voted for the Immigration Act of 1965, and only one senator from the Northeast voted against it.

If history is our guide, Southern Republicans in the House will again probably succeed in killing "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" this time around.

But what about next time? How long can we expect this charade to continue? For almost fifty years now, Dixie has voted for border security and against Third World immigration. But, because of the existence of the Union with the Northeast, West Coast, and Upper Midwest, we have gotten illegal alien amnesty, Open Borders, and Third World immigration—among a laundry list of other undesirable things that could never pass an all-Southern Congress.

…

Polls have already showed that, for example, 26% of Georgians and 42% of Georgia Republicans were prepared to support secession after President Obama’s re-election. GA Republicans split on secession, Deal vulnerable, Public Policy Polling, December 07, 2012. As Southerners consider Harold Meyerson's implacably hostile words, and as they react to the recent Supreme Court rulings on gay marriage and Affirmative Action, the recent Senate votes on illegal alien amnesty and gun control, and the upcoming debate on "climate change" legislation and the imminent implementation of Obamacare, millions of them have already no doubt begun—in the phrase widely used in the ante-bellum period—to "calculate the value of the Union."

VDARE’s James Kirkpatrick — whose bio simply reads, “James Kirkpatrick travels around the United States looking for a waiter who can speak English” — writes that immigration reform will “facilitate the Third World invasion” and “practically guarantees a never-ending terrorist threat.”

Fearful of the “the U.S. government's fanaticism in allowing in ever more Muslim immigrants,” Kirkpatrick claims that the government is “scheming to inflict tens of thousands of Syrian aliens on helpless American towns and cities” and encouraging “mass immigration of hostile Third Worlders.”

The government, Kirkpatrick writes, is treating “the historical American nation” as “the enemy” and will create a “permanent national security state.”

The government has met the enemy and it is us—the historic American nation.

Washington's long war on its own people has broken into the open, with reports that the National Security Agency, among others, has been spying on the phone calls and emails of American citizens. But at the same time, the Amnesty Establishment and its lackeys in the GOP claim that it is simply impossible to enforce immigration laws, deport illegals, or even build a border fence.

The simple truth: the feds can accomplish a lot if they want to—but reading your emails is higher on their priority list than fulfilling the fundamental responsibility of government.

…

Like Graham, Rubio claims that the government simply “can't deport millions.” But he has seemingly infinite faith in the right of the federal government to monitor American communications without a warrant. He claims it is “simply a reality” because “The threat that we face—largely radical, political Islamists—is probably a threat that is going to exist for the rest of our lifetimes.”

Of course, the reason this threat exists—aside from our adventurist foreign policy, which Rubio supports—is because of the U.S. government's fanaticism in allowing in ever more Muslim immigrants. Even now, as it becomes clear that the American government is backing a losing effort side in Syria, the State Department is scheming to inflict tens of thousands of Syrian aliens on helpless American towns and cities. But the Obama Administration—with the help of collaborators like Rubio—is simultaneously halting background checks on immigrants so as to facilitate the Third World invasion.

So much for preventing terrorism.

…

Arguing against Senator Rand Paul, McCain argues that America is a battlefield. Thanks to his de facto open borders policy, he's right.

Speaker John Boehner, fresh from his daughter's wedding to a dreadlocked Jamaican pothead, announced that he would do his best to make sure the Republican House would not oppose an immigration bill and would debate it. He chirped happily that they could have a bill by the “end of the year.”

…

Furthermore, mass immigration of hostile Third Worlders practically guarantees a never-ending terrorist threat—which of course provides further justification for the permanent national security state libertarians claim to oppose.

The Amnesty Establishment and its apologists are a comically obvious example of what the late Sam Francis called “anarcho-tyranny”: the government cracks down on law-abiding citizens while blithely ignoring (and even encouraging) criminality, parasitism, and outright treason.

The white nationalist group VDARE is tired of hearing “tearjerkers” about DREAMers, or undocumented immigrants who came to the US as children, and doesn’t want to hear another “sob-story about an illegal alien honor student.” The fact that DREAMers include honor students does not help their case, writes a VDARE columnist who is an “anonymous source inside the Beltway,” as “we already have too many lawyers and too few jobs and do not need another left-wing attorney taking up Affirmative Action spots.”

Barack Hussein Obama really outdid himself during his latest immigration speech. [Remarks by the President on Immigration Reform, June 11, 2013]. In almost every single speech he’s given on immigration, he concludes by giving a sob-story about an illegal alien honor student. However, in his latest speech, he bookended the speech with tearjerkers about two illegal aliens.

…

While the story of the illegal alien honor student has been trotted out by amnesty proponents for years, it seems like this has been the year of the Honor Student Surge.

I oppose the DREAM Act. Assuming these stories are true, they are not representative of the average DREAMer, and we already have too many lawyers and too few jobs and do not need another left-wing attorney taking up Affirmative Action spots.

VDARE’s Nicholas Stix went one step further, alleging that the “Minority Occupied Government” would use immigration reform to push an anti-white “ethnic cleansing” of the job market and ultimately white “extinction”. He goes on to say that white people will also face discrimination in “anti-white, minority and homosexual/feminist-dominated” academia.

“Younger whites will be increasingly unable to support children,” Stix continues. “With jailbreak-style immigration inflows of legal and illegal non-white immigration and an immigrant baby boom, whites will be even more rapidly rendered a minority…. Just as in South Africa today, whites will find themselves a despised, attacked, and increasingly poor minority in what used to be their country.”

This week, the full U.S. Senate is debating S.744, “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” a.k.a. the Amnesty/ Immigration Surge bill. What is at stake is not merely the dispossession of the historic American nation—but its extinction.

The Open Borders Lobby, both “Left” and “Right,” has one implicit theme when it comes to labor and immigration—traditional Americans don't count.

…

Critically, these government-sponsored invaders will enjoy a host of government-originated privileges and programs denied to actual Americans—especially whites.

Amnestied invaders and their relatives will enjoy Affirmative Action at all skill and educational levels (even South Asians are eligible), along with American blacks. The white American working class will be discriminated against throughout the job market.

…

Traditional Americans, especially native-born whites, will find themselves under increasing pressure to attend college, even if they have no interest in it, because of this ethnic cleansing of working class jobs. When they graduate, they will be trapped by immense student loan debt. They will then find themselves under pressure to attend graduate school, for yet another worthless degree, requiring even more debt.

If amnestied invaders decide to attend college, they will receive preferential admission and enjoy grade inflation (also here), allowing them to get better jobs than native-born white Americans;

Anti-white discrimination in academia and the culture will be dramatically strengthened. Jobs for professors are notoriously being reduced, as universities chop up formerly full-time teaching jobs into part-time adjunct positions. But also, and much less well-publicized: academia has been on a simultaneous hiring binge, creating well-paid, non-teaching positions in what Alan Kors and Harvey Silverglate call, in their eponymous book, The Shadow University —the anti-white, minority and homosexual/feminist-dominated political fiefdoms like “Student Life” and “Multicultural Services” that are reserved for commissars who are anti-white, anti-intellectual, and of dubious educational attainment.

…

Question: The overwhelming majority of those millions of white Americans who have been “disappeared” from the unemployment rolls are likely doubled-up with parents, siblings, and other relatives, or have spouses supporting them. But what happens when their parents die—or their relatives can no longer carry them?

Answer: the number of white Americans will dwindle—because they will age and die off, and younger whites will be increasingly unable to support children. (One of whites’ countless shortcomings: their belief that one must be able to support children before having them.) With jailbreak-style immigration inflows of legal and illegal non-white immigration and an immigrant baby boom, whites will be even more rapidly rendered a minority.

According to libertarian fantasy, a high-IQ, qualified, diligent, and law-abiding group, even a minority, should see its job prospects and income increase with Open Borders.

But the reality is that, in a thoroughly politicized economy dominated by plutocrats in alliance with a Minority Occupation Government, jobs and power will be deliberately transferred away from labor to capital and from whites to non-whites for reasons of cheapness and of race.

Just as in South Africa today, whites will find themselves a despised, attacked, and increasingly poor minority in what used to be their country—and no one in the Main Stream Media or the government will lift a voice in their defense.

That's what is at stake with this Amnesty/ Immigration Surge bill. It's not just dispossession—it's extinction.

One of the most fascinating things about last week’s conservative infighting over the Heritage Foundation’s immigration reform study was how it revealed the careful balance that “mainstream” groups like Heritage must maintain with the more radical elements of the conservative base.

All of which drives radical anti-immigrant groups crazy. The White Nationalist group VDARE, for instance, is livid that Richwine was booted from Heritage.

In a VDARE blog post Saturday, VDARE editor Peter Brimelow writes that “Beltway immigration patriots” who are “terrified to death of any sign of Political Incorrectness” will ultimately be powerless to stop comprehensive immigration reform. Instead, he writes, they will ultimately be dependent on people like himself and on xenophobia – or, “the very Incorrect sentiments of national identity etc.” – among the grassroots. These sentiments, he writes, were responsible for defeating immigration reform in 2007.

Weigel writes:

"Anyone could have predicted it. Richwine didn’t mind taking on taboos or talking to taboo people. That’s how immigration reform foes talk amongst themselves. That’s not how they’re going to stop the bill."

Actually, my observation is that the small community of Beltway immigration patriots are terrified to death of any sign of Political Incorrectness and have substantially internalized this inhibition.

But it doesn’t matter anyway, because what will really stop “immigration reform” a.k.a. the Amnesty/ Immigration Surge is grass roots opposition—as in 2007. And that is motivated by the very Incorrect sentiments of national identity etc.

Nevertheless, the Richwine saga has to make you wonder where America is headed.

VDARE Posts Archive

Ann Coulter has been making the rounds of conservative media over the past couple of weeks promoting her new book, “Adios America! The Left’s Plan To Turn Our Country Into A Third World Hellhole,” which is about as subtle an anti-immigrant polemic as it sounds.
As the Southern Poverty Law Center pointed out when Coulter’s book came out, Coulter remains a reliable presence in right-wing media and politics, despite the fact that her comments on race in America are pretty much indistinguishable from those of the white nationalist leaders who have largely been... MORE >

White nationalist commentator Peter Brimelow, the editor of VDARE, joined Steve Deace last week to discuss the reaction to a grand jury’s decision not to indict a Ferguson, Missouri, police officer in the shooting death of unarmed black teenager Michael Brown.
Deace told Brimelow that he thought President Obama — who opened his remarks on the grand jury decision by urging protesters to act “peacefully” — had not done enough to prevent violence and looting in Ferguson, and that the president should “have gone down to Ferguson and led peaceful... MORE >

James Kirkpatrick, a writer for the white nationalist website VDARE (home of former National Review columnist John Derbyshire and racist conservative strategist Steve Sailer) argued last week that if the GOP fails to impeach President Obama over his executive action on immigration, nativist Republicans should form a third party along the lines of the fiercely anti-immigrant United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP).
“The alternatives are clear,” Kirkpatrick wrote on Friday: “impeachment, or insurrection.”
The truth is only real legal weapon the Republican Congress... MORE >

TPM has dug up a 2012 interview in which North Carolina House Speaker and Republican U.S. Senate candidate Thom Tillis contrasts the growing black and Latino populations with the more stagnant “traditional population of North Carolina and the United States.” (The exchange starts about 2:45 into this video.)
Tills made the remarks while discussing the need for the Republican Party to reach out to and appeal to non-white voters — but the phrase “traditional population” as a euphemism for white Americans was lifted right from the racist, anti-immigrant fringe.
The... MORE >

The white nationalist website VDARE is once again demanding credit for an idea that it has been championing for years that has now gone mainstream in the GOP.
Last year, we reported that VDARE writer John Derbyshire (formerly of the National Review) was annoyed that prominent Republicans were failing to credit racist VDARE writer Steve Sailer when they advocated a plan nearly identical to the ‘Sailer Strategy’: that is, the idea that the GOP can only survive by solidifying and growing its white base while alienating people of color. Sailer had been persistently advocating this... MORE >

Steve Sailer of the white nationalist site VDARE – also known as the originator of the now-popular “Sailer Strategy” for an all-white GOP – has a modest proposal for a new, segregated government leadership.
Sailer, who has apparently had quite enough of President Obama, suggests in a blog post today that “a giant empire like modern America would be better off splitting the roles of ceremonial Head of State and utilitarian Head of Government, rather than in getting them all entwined.”
He recommends that the new ceremonial position would be the perfect fit... MORE >

Trust the white nationalists at VDARE.com to come up with a racist, anti-immigrant angle to the winter Olympics.
While others might have been touched by the story of Paraguayan-born American slopestyle skier Julia Marino becoming Paraguay’s very first winter Olympian (she holds dual citizenship), VDARE writer Matthew Richer sees it as proof that Latino immigrants are unable to assimilate into American culture. “If an Hispanic immigrant with this kind of privileged American upbringing cannot assimilate, what hope is there for the rest of them?” he writes.
Of course, Richer... MORE >

RWW’s Paranoia-Rama takes a look at five of the week’s most absurd conspiracy theories from the Right.
Did you know that you can be thrown in jail simply for criticizing President Obama? Or that Obama will soon pretend to speak with aliens as part of a ploy to silence the criticism that he has apparently already criminalized? Learn more in this week’s edition of Paranoia-Rama:
5. Obama’s Alien-Canadian Plot
Since President Obama failed to nuke the U.S. and kill 90 percent of Americans, activist Jim Garrow claims that he is now preparing “the greatest... MORE >